From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from aubrey.stanford.edu ([36.48.0.102]) by hawkwind.utcs.utoronto.ca with SMTP id <24753>; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 15:39:20 -0500
Received: (qmail 30503 invoked from network); 2 Feb 1999 02:01:28 -0000
Received: from localhost.stanford.edu (HELO aubrey.stanford.edu) (jimr@127.0.0.1)
  by localhost.stanford.edu with SMTP; 2 Feb 1999 02:01:28 -0000
X-url: http://highwire.stanford.edu/~jimr/
X-face: "!ZH^<"U,NeU:732A<C4y,*Cf?(iP<kPeb6%sXHk7p\H;56mY2n|J?=#=d0*O=8%G:xc2.f
 @r{2w5^o|Kn_v*t|P68T[9c-c=k90RX}Jht/v
Reply-to: Jim.Robinson@Stanford.Edu
From:	"James A. Robinson" <Jim.Robinson@Stanford.Edu>
To:	"Chaotrope" <chaotrope@jps.net>
cc:	sam-fans@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu
Dcc: 
Subject: Re: 9term under Linux? 
In-reply-to: Message from "Chaotrope" <chaotrope@jps.net> 
   of "Mon, 01 Feb 1999 16:25:45 PST."References: <199902020026.QAA13600@repop2.jps.net> 
 <199902020026.QAA13600@repop2.jps.net> 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <30490.917920887.1@aubrey.stanford.edu>
Date:	Mon, 1 Feb 1999 21:01:28 -0500
Sender: jimr@aubrey.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <99Feb2.153920est.24753@hawkwind.utcs.utoronto.ca>

> 'editors' and  a 'TeX' directory. So I'm leaning toward BSD rather
> than Linux just because that indicates to me that these people are
> "thinking" along those lines.
> 
> So my question is, e.g., Jim, what are you using? Is there a general
> consensus on ease of installation, whatever, getting this p9 'look and
> feel grafted on top of what version of Unix? Are there known problems
> with (obviously) RedHat vs. whatever?

Hi,

I'm using a heavily modified, stripped down, and generally munged
version of RedHat 5.0 here at work. At home I'm running a customized
Slackware 3.0 setup.

I've got a /usr/local/src/plan9 tree on the home machine which has
the source for 9menu 1.4, 9wm 1.2, es 0.90beta1, sam 4.3, 9term 1.6.6,
rc 1.5b2, and wily 0.13.41.  I've fiddled with the various make files
and source so that they all compile without any problem on my box. As
I recall, 9term is the hardest to compile. 9wm, 9menu, the editors,
and the shells compiled without any trouble. 9term now compiles, but it
does tend to give off quite a few "seems to be harmless" errors.

Oh yeah, all the little tools that wily comes with were a pain in the
ass to compile.  But I got win, and tools/shell/* to compile. So, if
people want to download entire 1.0 meg binaries and 2.9 meg source tree,
grab it from

		http://highwire.stanford.edu/~jimr/plan9/plan9.bin.tar.gz
		http://highwire.stanford.edu/~jimr/plan9/plan9.src.tar.gz

The only thing missing from the tars are the Xg unicode fonts. It doesn't
have a clear distribution-rights copyright statement, so I can't bundle
it in the archive.  I'm not even sure where I got them from originally,
so you'll have to hunt them up. =(

If you unarchive both from your root, they will go into

	/opt/plan9/^(bin doc lib man)

for the binaries, and

	/usr/local/src/plan9/^(9menu-1.4 9term-1.6.6 9wm-1.2 es-0.90beta1 rc-1.5b2 sam-4.3 wily-0.13.41)
	
for the source.


Jim